Proposal to Encourage Commercial Banks to Increase the Development of Cultural Industry Credit Business
I. Background and Issues
Accelerating the development of the cultural industry is not only an important way to improve the cultural living standards of the people, but also an important means to enhance a country's overall competitiveness. Since the reform and opening up, China's cultural industry has achieved remarkable development and is becoming a new growth point for economic development, presenting a flourishing trend. The state has clearly proposed in the "12th Five-Year Plan" the goal of "promoting the cultural industry to become a pillar industry of the national economy." However, compared with developed countries, the proportion of China's cultural industry in the national economy is still relatively low, and it is also one of the few industries with a trade deficit in foreign trade. In order to further improve the cultural living standards of the people and let the world know more about China, it is urgent to further increase the intensity of the development of the cultural industry.
Currently, the lack of funds and the unsmooth financing channels are one of the important bottlenecks restricting the development of the cultural industry. In 2010, the People's Bank of China, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Culture and other nine ministries jointly issued the "Guiding Opinions on Financial Support for the Revitalization and Prosperous Development of the Cultural Industry." Focusing on the effective connection between existing financial resources and the cultural industry, it was based on playing the role of credit, insurance, securities and other multi-level financial market resources. It made clear provisions and policy guidance in aspects such as credit product innovation and improving financial services, and proposed twenty measures for financial support for the development of the cultural industry. Local government departments have also formulated some specific measures according to local realities. Despite the many efforts made by governments at all levels to support the development of the cultural industry and promote financial institutions' cultural industry credit business, there are still problems such as the lack of effective arrangements at the policy level and insufficient enforcement at the execution level. For example, the risk-sharing and compensation mechanisms directly participated in by the government need to be improved, the tax and financial preferential support for the cultural industry is relatively weak, the operation of cultural industry property rights transactions is inconvenient, and the risk mitigation measures for the cultural industry are incomplete, etc.
II. Suggestions and Reasons
(a) Continue to formulate and introduce various policies to support the development of the cultural industry, and really optimize the external environment for the operation and development of cultural industry enterprises.
Considering the limitations of the market and resources, as well as the fact that most cultural industry enterprises are small and medium-sized enterprises with "light-asset" characteristics, it is suggested that the government optimize the external environment for the operation and development of cultural industry enterprises from the following aspects: First, when the government formulates various industrial revitalization policies, it should fully consider the characteristics of cultural industry enterprises, combine them with local industrial advantages, encourage and support the cluster development of the cultural industry, and form distinctive industrial clusters. Second, strengthen the protection of intellectual property rights, severely crack down on all kinds of piracy, and introduce feasible intellectual property protection and reward mechanisms. For instance, establish an innovation encouragement fund for the cultural industry at the national level to encourage cultural industry enterprises to increase their innovation efforts, support the development of emerging industries supported by high technology, and promote the rapid and good development of the cultural industry. Third, further break the barriers for private capital entering industries, further relax restrictions on private enterprises, reduce approval matters and procedures, and strengthen market monitoring; encourage social capital to enter emerging industries supported by high technology such as animation, online games, artistic design, digital content industry, and creative industries; at the same time, develop a stronger operational mechanism for the exit of private capital to reduce the risks of private capital investment in the cultural industry. Fourth, increase fiscal support for cultural industry enterprises. The state can evaluate cultural industry enterprises and implement fiscal subsidies or tax reductions for those with strong innovation capabilities and broad development space, thereby promoting the development of the cultural creativity industry.
(b) Strengthen the effective risk-sharing and compensation mechanisms to enhance commercial banks' confidence in financing cultural industry enterprises.
Commercial bank financing for the cultural industry is one of the core drivers supporting the development of cultural industry enterprises. Due to the common characteristics of cultural industry enterprises, such as light assets, insufficient collateral, and weak risk resistance, this leads to higher risks for commercial banks when financing cultural industry enterprises. Therefore, it is necessary to provide policy support for commercial banks to conduct cultural industry financing business. Specifically: First, the government should further strengthen the establishment and guidance of policy guarantee institutions or re-guarantee institutions for cultural industry enterprises, providing guarantees for commercial banks' financing for cultural industry enterprises and sharing the financing risks of cultural industry enterprises with banks; Second, set up a certain amount of cultural industry risk compensation fund, which will compensate for a certain percentage of the losses incurred by financial institutions in cultural industry financing.
(c) Introduce social capital and resources to develop a social credit system.
Since most existing cultural industry enterprises are SMEs, commercial banks often face information asymmetry during the credit granting process. To solve the problem of commercial banks being unable to effectively obtain accurate information when financing cultural industry enterprises and eliminate financing concerns, it is recommended to introduce social resources and capital, integrate information databases such as taxation, industry and commerce, customs, water and electricity, and social security, to provide an information platform support for financial institutions' financing of cultural industry enterprises. This can also promote the construction of social business integrity.
(d) Promote the establishment of a national intellectual property trading platform for cultural industry enterprises to promote the financing and development of cultural industry enterprises.
In recent years, intellectual property mortgage loans for cultural industry enterprises have developed rapidly. However, due to the lack of a national intellectual property trading platform for cultural industry enterprises, the liquidity of mortgaged intellectual property is poor, which is not conducive to the effective risk release of commercial banks. It is suggested that relevant national departments promote the establishment of a national intellectual property trading platform for the cultural industry to improve the liquidity of intellectual property, reduce the risks and costs for commercial banks to liquidate enterprise intellectual property mortgage assets, and thus encourage commercial banks to increase their credit support for cultural industry enterprises.
(e) Formulate quick write-off policies for non-performing loans of cultural industry enterprises.
To encourage commercial banks to vigorously carry out financing business for cultural industry enterprises, it is suggested that relevant national departments reduce the approval procedures for writing off non-performing loans and improve the efficiency of writing off bad debts of cultural industry enterprise loans. The write-off period should be determined to be no more than 180 days after the loss-type loan is recognized.
http://www.xyxdw.com/